US Ambassador: ‘We Are Watching’
By The Irrawaddy December 21, 2007
The US ambassador to Thailand told The Irrawaddy on Wednesday that he was convinced that change would come to military-ruled Burma and that he hoped it would come quickly.
US Ambassador Ralph BoyceDuring a 30-minute interview, Ambassador Ralph Boyce—who will soon finish his term in Thailand— also defended Washington’s policy on Burma, saying: “What I think is that our policy is important for the people who are struggling inside Burma. We don’t follow policy necessarily to try to impact the generals; they are fairly impervious—impermeable even— to outside pressure, for good or bad, it seems.
“Even some of the countries that people call ‘enablers’ or their ‘closest protectors’ or whatever—it’s unclear, at the end of the day, just how much influence even they can have.”
There has been growing criticism of the US’s image and their policies. Incoming Asean Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan recently said that the US’s influence in the region was on the wane. And critics have pointed out that the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, twice canceled visits to attend Asean meetings where the US traditionally sends its highest State Department official.
Ambassador Boyce responded: “I think it would be a misinterpretation to suggest that Secretary Rice’s inability to attend the last two or three meetings was because of her lack of attentiveness. We have a lot on our policy agenda and there are geographic and time constraints that make it a huge investment for a US Secretary to come out for an Asean meeting. It’s not because we don’t take Asean seriously.”
The ambassador added that the current US administration has upgraded its attention on Asean as an institution, as a region, and to the bilateral relationships it enjoys with each of the Asean partners.
He admitted that the Chinese were more influential in the region; however, he welcomed the strides China had taken.
“I think that Chinese diplomacy is very active in the region, as it should be,” he said. “Some people call it the emergence of China; it’s really the re-emergence of China. It’s a more natural state of things.”
Ambassador Boyce noted that the US had spent the last 50 years as “the preeminent power in the region.” That was, he said, very unusual in world history and had evolved after the Second World War because all the other major powers were preoccupied internally or elsewhere.
“What it means to the US is that it’s more challenging for us to maintain our influence and, if other countries are going to be more active in the region, it means that we have to be more active too,” he added.
On Burma, the ambassador said that the UN envoys’ visits to Burma were “extremely important.”
However, when asked if the US wished to send a special envoy to the region to deal with the Burmese generals, he replied: “Too many envoys spoil the broth.”
“The regime claims they will deal only with the UN, and they reject a regional approach: they certainly reject any intervention from actors like the US or the UK or the EU,” said Boyce.
He also praised Thailand for its long-term policy on dealing with refugees. “Everyone has been very attentive over the last decades to rumors that there were going to be major push-backs—whether it was with Cambodians, Vietnamese, Lao of various types, or Burmese of various types,” he said, concluding: “Thailand’s record is, in fact, pretty good on that score.”
Asked if the US would be willing to engage with Snr-Gen Than Shwe and the Burmese regime, Ambassador Boyce pointed out that an unpublicized meeting between senior US State Department officials and Burmese ministers had taken place some months before in Beijing.
Details of the talks were unknown, but Western diplomats said that they were cordial. However, the US did request the release of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. The ambassador said: “We engaged in Beijing—meetings that the Chinese brokered between the [Burmese] regime and ourselves; and as long as those discussions can produce something substantive as opposed to just ‘talk’—talking past each other—then I think we’re always ready to engage.”
Concluding the interview with a message of support to the people of Burma, the US ambassador said: “We are watching. Stay the course. We know the suffering. We will never change our policy about what is right in Burma. We are there.”
The US ambassador to Thailand told The Irrawaddy on Wednesday that he was convinced that change would come to military-ruled Burma and that he hoped it would come quickly.
US Ambassador Ralph BoyceDuring a 30-minute interview, Ambassador Ralph Boyce—who will soon finish his term in Thailand— also defended Washington’s policy on Burma, saying: “What I think is that our policy is important for the people who are struggling inside Burma. We don’t follow policy necessarily to try to impact the generals; they are fairly impervious—impermeable even— to outside pressure, for good or bad, it seems.
“Even some of the countries that people call ‘enablers’ or their ‘closest protectors’ or whatever—it’s unclear, at the end of the day, just how much influence even they can have.”
There has been growing criticism of the US’s image and their policies. Incoming Asean Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan recently said that the US’s influence in the region was on the wane. And critics have pointed out that the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, twice canceled visits to attend Asean meetings where the US traditionally sends its highest State Department official.
Ambassador Boyce responded: “I think it would be a misinterpretation to suggest that Secretary Rice’s inability to attend the last two or three meetings was because of her lack of attentiveness. We have a lot on our policy agenda and there are geographic and time constraints that make it a huge investment for a US Secretary to come out for an Asean meeting. It’s not because we don’t take Asean seriously.”
The ambassador added that the current US administration has upgraded its attention on Asean as an institution, as a region, and to the bilateral relationships it enjoys with each of the Asean partners.
He admitted that the Chinese were more influential in the region; however, he welcomed the strides China had taken.
“I think that Chinese diplomacy is very active in the region, as it should be,” he said. “Some people call it the emergence of China; it’s really the re-emergence of China. It’s a more natural state of things.”
Ambassador Boyce noted that the US had spent the last 50 years as “the preeminent power in the region.” That was, he said, very unusual in world history and had evolved after the Second World War because all the other major powers were preoccupied internally or elsewhere.
“What it means to the US is that it’s more challenging for us to maintain our influence and, if other countries are going to be more active in the region, it means that we have to be more active too,” he added.
On Burma, the ambassador said that the UN envoys’ visits to Burma were “extremely important.”
However, when asked if the US wished to send a special envoy to the region to deal with the Burmese generals, he replied: “Too many envoys spoil the broth.”
“The regime claims they will deal only with the UN, and they reject a regional approach: they certainly reject any intervention from actors like the US or the UK or the EU,” said Boyce.
He also praised Thailand for its long-term policy on dealing with refugees. “Everyone has been very attentive over the last decades to rumors that there were going to be major push-backs—whether it was with Cambodians, Vietnamese, Lao of various types, or Burmese of various types,” he said, concluding: “Thailand’s record is, in fact, pretty good on that score.”
Asked if the US would be willing to engage with Snr-Gen Than Shwe and the Burmese regime, Ambassador Boyce pointed out that an unpublicized meeting between senior US State Department officials and Burmese ministers had taken place some months before in Beijing.
Details of the talks were unknown, but Western diplomats said that they were cordial. However, the US did request the release of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. The ambassador said: “We engaged in Beijing—meetings that the Chinese brokered between the [Burmese] regime and ourselves; and as long as those discussions can produce something substantive as opposed to just ‘talk’—talking past each other—then I think we’re always ready to engage.”
Concluding the interview with a message of support to the people of Burma, the US ambassador said: “We are watching. Stay the course. We know the suffering. We will never change our policy about what is right in Burma. We are there.”
Facing the Endgame
By Min Zin December 21, 2007
Recent weeks have been frustrating for Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma's democracy icon. Hope of starting political dialogue with the regime's supremo, Snr-Gen Than Shwe, is now dim.
Although there was an agreement on holding weekly meetings every Monday between Suu Kyi and government liaison minister Aung Kyi, the regime has gone back on its word. No meeting has taken place between Suu Kyi and Aung Kyi since November 19. Moreover, the military's promise of allowing two liaison officials from her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), to see her regularly has yet to be realized.
"Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been trying very hard to keep the communication channel open,” said a senior party official on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. “She even plans to make a positive response to the preconditions of junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe. But the regime has simply ignored her,"
The frustration is now spreading within the international community. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned Burma during his recent trip to Asia that the international community's patience is wearing thin. "I know the international community is very much impatient, and our patience is running out," Ban said in Bangkok.
Meanwhile, the junta is sending mixed signals to the international community. In his official briefing on November 6, Information Minister Brig-Gen Kyaw Hsan, a staunch junta hardliner, threatened UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari that the government's cooperation with the UN could be jeopardized if his performance were viewed to be "unfair and one-sided.” Kyaw Hsan told Gambari straight that "your opportunity to play a constructive role in the matter may be in harm's way."
However, when Burmese Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein received Gambari on the following day the general reiterated his government's full confidence in and support for the Secretary-General's good offices.
"The Prime Minister invited me to return to Myanmarin his words"again, again and again"," Gambari said at a briefing to the UN Security Council on November 13.
Moreover, as a gesture of response to the UN's persistent demand for an inclusive constitutional process, Thein Sein told Gambari that the government would allow him to meet with its Constitutional Drafting Commission to discuss ways of broadening the constitutional process.
On the other hand, at his press conference on December 3, Kyaw Hsan said that the government's 54-member commission for drafting the new constitution is sufficient for the task.
"No assistance or advice from other persons is required," he said, adding that "it is not reasonable or fair to amend those principles adopted by the delegates (of the National Convention)." Kyaw Hsan ruled out the possibility of a role for the opposition to play in the constitutional drafting process, the most important and first three stages of the regime's "Seven-Step Road Map to democracy."
In fact, the military is testing the responses of the international community by sending out such mixed messages. If the international community, especially China and Asean takes a passive stand or backs down, the regime will push forward with its hardline stance. When Asean caved in to the demands of the regime by not allowing Gambari to give a Burma briefing at the Asean summit in November, hardliners in Rangoon celebrated their victory and started scratching regular scheduled meetings with Suu Kyi.
"Burma's military leadership is just trying to do the absolute minimum transition and reconciliation possible,” Priscilla Clapp, a US diplomat who served as Chief of Mission in Burma from 1999-2002, told The Irrawaddy. “They will continue with their seven step plan, moving very slowly, and wait for the international community to lose interest and turn the other way."
However, some analysts and activists believe that the junta's seven-step “Road Map” can still be a potential and viable option for Burma's transition if it were modified to become inclusive and time-bound. They think that the junta is resisting, not rejecting, the possibility of accommodating its “Road Map.”
"It is not too late yet. If the international community could push the regime to open up the constitutional drafting process before a national referendum, the fourth stage of the seven-step ‘Road Map,’ we can still have time and find common ground for negotiation for Burma's political transition," said Dr Thaung Tun, UN representative of National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), the Burmese government in exile.
In fact, this is just what 92 elected Members of Parliament from inside Burma called for in August 2007. They urged the regime to modify the “Road Map,” which is now aimed at legalizing military supremacy in Burma's future with the military's new constitution. The elected MPs said that if the regime made it inclusive, they would like to cooperate and find a political solution within the ‘Road Map’ framework. Almost all major political and ethnic groups in Burma have agreed with the political proposal of the 92 elected MPs.
This is also in line with the UN's persistent demand as Gambari made clear when he said: "The Secretary-General did not reject the seven-step ‘Road Map’ and what he would like to suggest were inclusiveness and time frame."
However, if the regime refused to modify the ‘Road Map’ and continued its unilateral plan, the nature of Burma's conflict would become zero-sum. The 92 elected MPs have vowed to oppose the junta's sham constitution and to educate and organize the people of Burma to vote against it in the referendum.
Pro-democracy grass-root activists inside Burma as well as abroad also declare that the regime's planned referendum will be showdown time for Burma if the military fails to modify the ‘Road Map.’ They say there will be almost no chance to reverse legalization of military domination after a referendum, since the rest of the ‘Road Map’ will be to "(5) hold free and fair elections; (6) convene elected bodies and (7) create government organs instituted by the legislative body."
"The principles of constitution drafted by the military are laid out with the premise of 'military the master and civilian the slave' concept," said Tun Myint Aung, a leader of the 88 Generation Students Group, speaking from his hideout inside Burma. "We are now preparing to educate the people and launch a 'No Vote Campaign' against the referendum."
Some analysts even argue that another mass protest against the junta may break out before the time of the referendum, and lead to political turmoil, as a combination of poverty and repression fuels the public's anger.
No matter whether or not the opposition activists could succeed in derailing military's ‘Road Map’ with mass protests, the nature of Burma's conflict and its consequences will be devastating, with more violent crackdowns and human suffering. The international community must be aware of this grim scenario and act resolutely to prevent it.
Min Zin is an exiled journalist living in the US
Recent weeks have been frustrating for Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma's democracy icon. Hope of starting political dialogue with the regime's supremo, Snr-Gen Than Shwe, is now dim.
Although there was an agreement on holding weekly meetings every Monday between Suu Kyi and government liaison minister Aung Kyi, the regime has gone back on its word. No meeting has taken place between Suu Kyi and Aung Kyi since November 19. Moreover, the military's promise of allowing two liaison officials from her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), to see her regularly has yet to be realized.
"Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been trying very hard to keep the communication channel open,” said a senior party official on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. “She even plans to make a positive response to the preconditions of junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe. But the regime has simply ignored her,"
The frustration is now spreading within the international community. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned Burma during his recent trip to Asia that the international community's patience is wearing thin. "I know the international community is very much impatient, and our patience is running out," Ban said in Bangkok.
Meanwhile, the junta is sending mixed signals to the international community. In his official briefing on November 6, Information Minister Brig-Gen Kyaw Hsan, a staunch junta hardliner, threatened UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari that the government's cooperation with the UN could be jeopardized if his performance were viewed to be "unfair and one-sided.” Kyaw Hsan told Gambari straight that "your opportunity to play a constructive role in the matter may be in harm's way."
However, when Burmese Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein received Gambari on the following day the general reiterated his government's full confidence in and support for the Secretary-General's good offices.
"The Prime Minister invited me to return to Myanmarin his words"again, again and again"," Gambari said at a briefing to the UN Security Council on November 13.
Moreover, as a gesture of response to the UN's persistent demand for an inclusive constitutional process, Thein Sein told Gambari that the government would allow him to meet with its Constitutional Drafting Commission to discuss ways of broadening the constitutional process.
On the other hand, at his press conference on December 3, Kyaw Hsan said that the government's 54-member commission for drafting the new constitution is sufficient for the task.
"No assistance or advice from other persons is required," he said, adding that "it is not reasonable or fair to amend those principles adopted by the delegates (of the National Convention)." Kyaw Hsan ruled out the possibility of a role for the opposition to play in the constitutional drafting process, the most important and first three stages of the regime's "Seven-Step Road Map to democracy."
In fact, the military is testing the responses of the international community by sending out such mixed messages. If the international community, especially China and Asean takes a passive stand or backs down, the regime will push forward with its hardline stance. When Asean caved in to the demands of the regime by not allowing Gambari to give a Burma briefing at the Asean summit in November, hardliners in Rangoon celebrated their victory and started scratching regular scheduled meetings with Suu Kyi.
"Burma's military leadership is just trying to do the absolute minimum transition and reconciliation possible,” Priscilla Clapp, a US diplomat who served as Chief of Mission in Burma from 1999-2002, told The Irrawaddy. “They will continue with their seven step plan, moving very slowly, and wait for the international community to lose interest and turn the other way."
However, some analysts and activists believe that the junta's seven-step “Road Map” can still be a potential and viable option for Burma's transition if it were modified to become inclusive and time-bound. They think that the junta is resisting, not rejecting, the possibility of accommodating its “Road Map.”
"It is not too late yet. If the international community could push the regime to open up the constitutional drafting process before a national referendum, the fourth stage of the seven-step ‘Road Map,’ we can still have time and find common ground for negotiation for Burma's political transition," said Dr Thaung Tun, UN representative of National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), the Burmese government in exile.
In fact, this is just what 92 elected Members of Parliament from inside Burma called for in August 2007. They urged the regime to modify the “Road Map,” which is now aimed at legalizing military supremacy in Burma's future with the military's new constitution. The elected MPs said that if the regime made it inclusive, they would like to cooperate and find a political solution within the ‘Road Map’ framework. Almost all major political and ethnic groups in Burma have agreed with the political proposal of the 92 elected MPs.
This is also in line with the UN's persistent demand as Gambari made clear when he said: "The Secretary-General did not reject the seven-step ‘Road Map’ and what he would like to suggest were inclusiveness and time frame."
However, if the regime refused to modify the ‘Road Map’ and continued its unilateral plan, the nature of Burma's conflict would become zero-sum. The 92 elected MPs have vowed to oppose the junta's sham constitution and to educate and organize the people of Burma to vote against it in the referendum.
Pro-democracy grass-root activists inside Burma as well as abroad also declare that the regime's planned referendum will be showdown time for Burma if the military fails to modify the ‘Road Map.’ They say there will be almost no chance to reverse legalization of military domination after a referendum, since the rest of the ‘Road Map’ will be to "(5) hold free and fair elections; (6) convene elected bodies and (7) create government organs instituted by the legislative body."
"The principles of constitution drafted by the military are laid out with the premise of 'military the master and civilian the slave' concept," said Tun Myint Aung, a leader of the 88 Generation Students Group, speaking from his hideout inside Burma. "We are now preparing to educate the people and launch a 'No Vote Campaign' against the referendum."
Some analysts even argue that another mass protest against the junta may break out before the time of the referendum, and lead to political turmoil, as a combination of poverty and repression fuels the public's anger.
No matter whether or not the opposition activists could succeed in derailing military's ‘Road Map’ with mass protests, the nature of Burma's conflict and its consequences will be devastating, with more violent crackdowns and human suffering. The international community must be aware of this grim scenario and act resolutely to prevent it.
Min Zin is an exiled journalist living in the US
No comments:
Post a Comment